Phlebology · 2014
Duplex investigations in children: Are clinical signs in children with venous disorders relevant?
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Birgitte Maessen-Visch M, Smeets L, van Vleuten C
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: Ultra sound colored duplex sonography is the preferred method in diagnosing chronic venous disease. Data in children on incidence, indications, and results are lacking.
METHODS: From the total of 9180 duplex investigations performed in our hospital from 2009 to 2012, data on indication and results of the investigation as well as patient characteristics were evaluated retrospectively for the proportion of pediatric patients.
RESULTS: Duplex investigations were performed 49 times in 38 children (6-18 years), with an average of 1.3 times (1-6 times) per child. Forty percent showed abnormalities: 17 times deep venous thrombosis was suspected; deep venous thrombosis was objectified in 18%. In the 21 investigations performed for varicosis-related complaints, varicose veins or venous malformations were objectified in 57%. Edema was never a symptom of chronic venous disease.
CONCLUSIONS: Duplex investigation is not often performed in children. In children with established deep venous thrombosis, a family history with deep venous thrombosis is common. In general, edema was not seen in children with varicose veins and, therefore, does not seem a reliable clinical sign at young age.
METHODS: From the total of 9180 duplex investigations performed in our hospital from 2009 to 2012, data on indication and results of the investigation as well as patient characteristics were evaluated retrospectively for the proportion of pediatric patients.
RESULTS: Duplex investigations were performed 49 times in 38 children (6-18 years), with an average of 1.3 times (1-6 times) per child. Forty percent showed abnormalities: 17 times deep venous thrombosis was suspected; deep venous thrombosis was objectified in 18%. In the 21 investigations performed for varicosis-related complaints, varicose veins or venous malformations were objectified in 57%. Edema was never a symptom of chronic venous disease.
CONCLUSIONS: Duplex investigation is not often performed in children. In children with established deep venous thrombosis, a family history with deep venous thrombosis is common. In general, edema was not seen in children with varicose veins and, therefore, does not seem a reliable clinical sign at young age.